The bare facts are frightening: In June 2000 the National Audit Office said that there were at least 100,000 Hospital Acquired Infections (HAI's) a year costing the taxpayer about £1 billion pounds per annum. Each year since then the rate of infections has actually increased.
About 1 in 10 in-patients can expect to be infected. If you are lucky, this will result in nothing more that some discomfort and an extended stay in hospital. If you are not so lucky it could end in disability and even death. About 5000 deaths a year to be precise. Many commentators and observers believe the true figure to be closer to 20,000.
While the turnaround of patients has to increase, due to the growing numbers of the aging population, this will cause even more serious problems for Hospitals in the UK. More people mean more visitors and more staff. The problem will never be solved by trying to keep areas clean. You must immunize the patient before entry. Resistance is the only vertified barrier in the fight against MRSA. As new strains develop, the problem is set to worsen and many people now dread hospitalisation.
The New Silver Solution can help you fight the effects of MRSA. By taking the small recommended dosage each day before admission, you can help immunise yourself against this dreaded pathogen. Doctors are favourable about Silver products and many Silver items are already being trialled.
Unfortunately, The New Silver Solution is only currently available via shipment from the USA. Normal delivery time takes about 1-2 weeks but it's well worth the wait. If your order is urgent, then please contact me directly, as I may be able to help you with stocks that are held here in the UK.
Other Colloidal silver products do not have this sort of pedigree.
Extracted from: Mail Online
MRSA - It's even worse than you think
Last updated at 23:58 15 January 2007 Experts claim there are almost 100,000 cases of MRSA in England each year
Over the past weeks and months, the subject of MRSA has never been far from Claire Rayner's mind.
It's not just that as president of the Patients Association the topic dominates her in-tray, so much as the fact that last October she was struck down by the superbug for the third time in five years.
Claire, who is 76, tripped at home, fell over and cut her leg.
She was taken by ambulance to her local accident and emergency department for stitches.
"I sat there for four hours with a huge open wound before anyone came to deal with me," says the celebrated agony aunt, who is herself a trained nurse.
"When I woke up the following day, it was obvious that something was wrong. My leg was heavily swollen. I took one look and knew I had an infection."
Tests showed that Claire was suffering from not one healthcare-associated infection (HCAI) but two - MRSA and pseudomonas.
Both prevented the wound from healing and both required treatment with powerful antibiotics which, three months on, Claire is still having to take.
"It has been a bloody nuisance," she admits.
"The antibiotics I am on give me wobbly legs, and only yesterday I fell again. The whole thing has been very frustrating."
A few miles away from Claire's North London home, matters of MRSA have also been topping the agenda of a select coterie of high-ranking Labour mandarins and spin doctors.
Forget the plight of Claire and the hundreds of thousands like her who have been struck down and even killed by the bug over the past decade, what they have been concerned with is saving face.
Three years ago, John Reid, then Health Secretary, promised to halve the number of MRSA cases by April 2008.
It was a bold pledge that could have been achieved only with massive investment.
That has not been forthcoming, so instead the apparatchiks have been busily discussing how best to avoid admitting they got it wrong; that they have failed.
In a memo leaked to the Press last week, the director of health protection at the Department of Health, Liz Woodeson, admitted: "We are not on course to hit that target and there is some doubt about whether it is, in fact, achievable."
She then listed how this failure could be handled in the least embarrassing way possible for the Government.
Options included dropping the target altogether or putting it back a year - a revealing insight into the machinations of the health establishment and one that, for the 12 million people treated by the NHS each year, is deeply worrying.
For as a Mail investigation today reveals, there is real concern that a decade of dithering has allowed MRSA to get out of hand.
While Government figures suggest there are just 7,000 cases of MRSA in England each year, experts put it at nearer 100,000.
They warn that the systems in place to measure the extent of the problem are woefully inadequate and that new strains of the bug are poised to overwhelm the NHS.
Against this background, the Government has concentrated almost all its energies on a campaign to get medical staff to wash their hands.
A good idea, but in a health service where targets are king, where beds are never empty and nurses are massively overstretched, it's simply not working.
At the same time, the Government stands accused of stonewalling in the face of innovation, of failing to invest in possible new solutions.
Hardly surprising, then, that there is a growing perception that MRSA is out of control.
Hardly surprising that people are so terrified of going into hospital they would rather suffer at home, go private or travel abroad for treatment.
And hardly surprising that the Government is desperate to conceal its failings.
MRSA is the name given to a group of bacteria that is resistant to methicillin-type antibiotics.
If MRSA enters the body through a cut, graze or any break in the skin, it can cause infections such as boils. If it enters the bloodstream, it can lead to more severe consequences, such as pneumonia, septicaemia, septic arthritis, heart-valve infections and death.
Ask the Department of Health if this country has a problem with MRSA and staff there will claim the situation is improving.
That's because in the last batch of figures submitted by hospital trusts for 2005, the number of recorded MRSA infections dipped slightly from 7,233 to 7,087, a 2 per cent decline.
Cause for celebration? Hardly.
At the end of this month, figures for 2006 are to be released. Health service sources have told the Mail that they are expected to show the problem is on the rise again.
Furthermore, experts point out that figures gathered by the DoH are flawed because they focus only on MRSA bacteraemias or bloodstream infections.
Dr Mark Enright, a microbiologist at Imperial College, London, explains: "The blood figure is easy to measure because they always look for bacteria in a patient's blood if they have a fever."
But MRSA is found not only in the blood, he says. "If they wanted to find out how much MRSA really was there, they would take all the samples from bone swabs, eye swabs, wound swabs. But they don't."
Experts estimate that the total figure of MRSA infections could be ten times higher, or even more.
Revealingly, last year the Conservatives used the Freedom of Information Act to access hospital records on all types of MRSA infections.
Figures they obtained showed that in 63 of England?s 174 NHS trusts, 34,432 patients were found to be carrying the superbug in 2004.
If averaged out across all 174 NHS trusts, this would amount to 547 cases per trust and a total of nearly 96,000 - 13 times higher than the official figure of 7,212.
Dr Enright says that it is in the trusts interests that MRSA blood figures are kept as low as possible.
"If you have a surgical wound infection, often the MRSA will not have got into your blood until you have been discharged and are back home," he says.
"So you go back into hospital, have a blood test and it is MRSA positive, but they are able to say that you picked it up at home, not at hospital, so don't add it to their figures.
"The hospitals are doing all they can to report low figures because there are a lot of negative things attached to reporting MRSA rates. It is a bit of a game, really. If they do badly, the DoH will send in a hit squad and take control, which the trusts don't like."
Experts claim that a more accurate reflection of the scale of the problem may be found elsewhere.
Latest figures from the Office for National Statistics show that between 2003 and 2004, the number of deaths in which MRSA was mentioned on the death certificate rose by 22 per cent to some 1,160. (Again, this is almost certainly an underestimate as it is the complications caused by MRSA rather than MRSA itself that are normally recorded on the certificate.)
They also revealed that the MRSA infection was six times more likely to be mentioned on the death certificate of patients in NHS hospitals and care homes than those who died elsewhere.
While the debate over the true extent of MRSA infections will run and run, there can be little argument over its impact on the NHS.
The average in-patient stay in England is seven days; those who contract MRSA will require a further 28 days treatment, during which time a further four patients could have been treated. All in all it is estimated to cost the NHS £1billion a year.
Forget the added suffering of patients, the wounds that won't heal, the amputations and the deaths, tackling MRSA makes sound economic sense. So what has been done?
Put simply, the Government has told people to wash their hands.
There is no doubt that science supports this strategy (MRSA is most often passed on via the hands of healthcare workers, from surfaces to patients or between patients) and while great strides have been taken in educating medical staff, it seems unlikely that it will ever fully succeed.
The crux of the problem facing the Government is that to tackle MRSA requires huge political will and significant investment, neither of which has been forthcoming.
"I believe that the problem of healthcare-associated infections now is rather like global warming was a few years ago," explains Professor Richard James, a biomolecular scientist at Nottingham University.
"People were arguing about the science and whether it was going to happen. But now everyone is on board in the UK: all the politicians believe it is serious, that we have got to do something, that it's going to cost money, but if we don't it will be horrendous."
The Government's current position is largely dictated by the need to fulfil election pledges to slash waiting times.
This has created bed occupancy rates that are now so high, experts claim they work against the execution of effective infection control procedures.
Simply put: if beds are always filled, it means there is less opportunity to clean as thoroughly.
Given this background, many now believe the only way to tackle MRSA is to radically restructure the way in which patients are treated from the moment they arrive in hospital.
"A key component of one strategy to reduce MRSA is screening patients on admission to hospital and then isolating them until you know the results of that screening," says Professor James, who is the director of a new centre specialising in healthcare-associated infections.
"The technology is available to do that quickly now, and it is what they do in Holland and Scandinavia. They assume everyone has MRSA until it is proved they do not.
"Of course, it has implications on the design of hospitals, with a need for a lot more small rooms, sufficient staff and restrictions on visitors.
"But computer modelling has shown that if you screened on admission and isolated, then within six years the MRSA bacteraemia rates here would fall to the best of the European levels."
(Britain has one of the worst records for MRSA in Europe. A recent report put the UK fifth bottom for rates of the superbug, above only Malta, Romania, Cyprus and Portugal.)
While initial costs would be large, it can be argued that a reduction in MRSA rates would compensate for the outlay. But at the same time bed occupancy rates would fall - something that could result in heavy political fallout.
If such radical steps are unlikely in the near future, then it might be hoped that other less expensive approaches would be adopted.
Unfortunately, this isn't happening either.
Three years ago, a body called the Rapid Review Panel was set up by the Health Protection Agency to consider new products that would help in the fight against MRSA and to fast-track them into hospitals.
But companies who have come into contact with the panel say there is nothing about it that is remotely rapid.
James Darley is a spokesman for a company called Air Science, which has developed a portable air-purifying unit.
Tests at Nottingham City Hospital found that, when deployed in the rooms of three patients with MRSA, they decreased the dispersal of the bacteria by up to 96 per cent.
These findings were presented to the Rapid Review Panel, which gave it a Level 2 recommendation, the second highest endorsement.
All well and good - apart from the fact that a Level 1 recommendation is the only basis upon which hospital trusts will consider buying a new product.
"They can't give us a Level 1 until we have done detailed and extensive clinical trials," says Mr Darley.
"But to demand trials in an NHS clinical setting is unrealistic for a small company.
"It is a no-brainer. The cost of leasing or operating one of these machines is far lower than one case of MRSA to that same hospital." (The machines cost £1,800 to buy.)
Mr Darley is not alone in his criticisms of the panel. Brian Baker, the owner of Greenbridge, a company in Bristol, has spent three years trying to persuade hospitals to use Activ8, a non-toxic cleaner approved by Professor John Oxford, the Government's top scientific adviser, and the Health Protection Agency.
Activ8 works by irreversibly binding, penetrating and immobilising bacteria, viruses and fungi so they cannot replicate, leaving surfaces disinfected and safe to use.
It costs about £30 to clean a ward with Activ8, compared to thousands of pounds for conventional fluids, but Mr Baker says all his efforts have been blocked by the "arrogance" of NHS bosses who "just don't care".
What adds urgency to the search for solutions is the fact that a new, more virulent strain of MRSA, called PVL MRSA, has claimed its first victims in Britain.
PVL destroys white blood cells, leaving the immune system too weak to fight the infection.
Signs of infection include pneumonia, coughing up blood and very high temperatures, with only a quarter of victims surviving PVL if it spreads to the lungs.
"We don?t know how much PVL MRSA there is as no one has been looking for it," says Dr Enright of Imperial College.
"The PVL is more aggressive and spreads faster, and if you take the United States as an example of where we are going to be in a couple of years, then there is trouble ahead."
So it appears that at the start of 2007, the future for British patients is not a promising one.
Today, it is not their operations they fear so much as the infections they might catch while undergoing those operations.
The Government might do better to stop the spin and instead start listening to the stories of those who have suffered or lost loved ones as a result of MRSA - the likes of Marie Archer, a 70-year-old from Royston, Hertfordshire, whose husband Ken died two years ago after being infected with the bug at Addenbrooke's Hospital.
Marie was recently diagnosed with breast cancer but was so frightened of going into an NHS hospital that she spent all her savings on private treatment.
"My husband was a fantastic man who was loved by so many people and who should have been here, by my side, to this day, she says.
"After what happened to him, there was no way I would go into a NHS hospital."
But the last word goes to Judith Izenstain. The 48-year-old council worker from Birmingham contracted MRSA after undergoing a knee operation in 2003.
Subsequent infections have nearly cost her her life and now she is set to have her leg amputated.
"When I went into hospital I had never heard of MRSA," she says.
"Now I think of nothing else.
"Today, everyone knows someone who has suffered from MRSA. How long will it be before everyone knows someone who has died from it?"
Michael's Footnote: It is quite evident that Governmental departments are 'influenced' by the giant pharmaceutical companies and that panels and review bodies are nothing more than 'gatekeepers' for the pharmaceutical giants. All the media seems 'influenced' by Big-Pharma and that's not surprising, as millions of pounds each year is spent on advertising through these mediums. The real truth, is that your life is worthless!
Look after yourself and forget about Government safety standards - They do not exist. If you are troubled by MRSA, or are going into hospital, invest in New Silver Solution and protect yourself. Order New Silver Solution
Warning: Dietary supplements are not to be used to prevent or treat any disease. The Statements on this web page have not been evaluated by the FDA. Any information provided on this website is not a substitute for the advice of a licensed medical practitioner. Individuals are advised not to self-medicate in the presence of significant illness. Ingredients in supplements are not drugs and may not be foods. We do not advise unsupervised administration of supplements to children and no supplements should be taken in pregnancy without professional advice.